The bold arabic numbers correspond to the areas where the photographs were taken by the SS, classified in the order of the Album

Drawing 3764 [Photo 22], an overall plan of the Bauleitung camp was used as a basis for positioning the photographs in the “Album d'Auschwitz” published by Seuil in November 1983, for which I created the French version by adding historical details to the original English text, rearranging the order of the photographs and adding an annex on the four Birkenau Krematorien.

As soon as the “Album d'Auschwitz” was published, a tract signed R Faurisson and dated 9th December 1983 was received by different media representatives, accusing me of betraying the

“cause of the victims of the deportation … by a number of little tricks, of which here is an example:

·

in order to make us think that the path taken by the deportees finished up at Krematorien II and III, [this author has] truncated the plan ofAuschwitz-Birkenau.

·

In reality, the road continued to the big shower and disinfection [sic] center, the “Zentral Sauna”.

·

As will he seen below, we have marked with arrows the two cuts unjustifiably made and we present the true plan of the camp, as it appears in all the standard works.

The verso of this text was the page reproduced here [Photo 23], which was but the preamble to ten pages of venomous criticism, which I was easily able to counter in an article whose publication was not deemed necessary.

R. Faurisson, the “professor”, who, far from being newcomer to the negation of the existence of homicidal gas chambers, has already devoted 20 years of his life to it, is capable of original thought, but is not above appropriating the work of others, in well-tried academic fashion. He hates the emergence of “new historical facts”, already being exhausted by the specious intellectual efforts he had to make, at least at the beginning of his “Affair” to try to refute the rare (two) convincing documents known in France proving the reality of the Birkenau gas chambers. Since then, he has been living on his “legal reputation” acquired thanks to a decision of the Paris court of appeal, 1st chamber, section A, of 26th April 1983, to the effect that “it must be observed that the accusations of superficiality levelled against him [R Faurisson] lack pertinence and are not satifactorily established”, and at present “nobody can establish proof of falsehood.” His method of historical investigation being thus “recognized”, which would only be fair if he is indeed the author, which still remains to be demonstrated, the fact remains that he never pressed research to the limit for fear of finding the strict truth. Furthermore, by virtue of this decision he is able to drag before the courts anybody who accuses him of being a “falsifier”, which is a strange state of affairs.

Comparing the original Bauleitung drawing with the Seuil drawing reveals the low tricks to which I stooped. If Faurisson does not like the plan of the POW camp, let him apply to the ex-Auschwitz Bauleitung, who will be happy to show him about forty others, all different. Unfortunately for Faurisson, these drawings are in Eastern Europe, in Oswiecim, in the hands of the “Polono-Stalinist” falsifiers he has so often denounced. As for the “standard works” he mentions, it should be pointed out that the FIRST concrete evidence was published in Poland in 1946, “Biuletyn I, Glownej Komisji Badania Zbrodni Niemieckich w Polsce” [Bulletin I of the Central Commission for the investigation of German crimes in Poland], and includes a chapter on Auschwitz, certainly written by Judge Jan Sehn, who selected precisely Bauleitung drawing 3764 of 23/3/44 to represent the Birkenau camp [page 64, illustration 7]. I think it was a good choice, because the drawing is clear.